Managed forests produce more oxygen for the atmosphere than old forests. Old trees at the end of their life cycle use more oxygen than they produce.

Forest fires are greatly reduced by managing the forest.

St Petersburg FL

Username hidden
(989 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Destin

My uncle is a forester in West Virginia and is probably a member of the association you mentioned. Check out his website and click on "forestry" menu item on the left and they give a good disertation as to why forests "need" to be managed rather than left alone.

www*jimchamer*com

St Petersburg FL

Username hidden
(989 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Perfect you are correct in that "The King's Pine" only exists in one town that I know of in the entire state of New Hampshire and that would be Bradford.

It is largely suspected but challenging to prove that there has not been an "Old growth" forest here in NH or VT since the Hypsithermal period, and the reason being given as periodic hurricanes, and fires tended to level most of it.

Grantham NH

Username hidden
(1470 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

In New Hampshire and Vermont in 1840 there were approximately only 20% to 25% of each state that had any forest left standing.

During the great move West to Ohio much of these lands were abandoned, largely due to the difficulty in farming many areas (not all but many).

The resultant re-growth of pioneer species such as poplar, birch, cherry and pine contributed to what was referred to as the "pine box industry" boom of 1900 to 1920.

Since that time (The White Mountain National forest excluded) much of the state's forest has shifted from coniferous to deciduous growth so that today approximately 80% of both states are forested.

In fact timber harvesting laws have become so restrictive now, that much of the timber has aged past it's prime and is in decline with respect to commercial use. Proper stewardship of timber should provide for regular harvesting and management.

Timber is and will continue to be one of the most environmentally useful resources. If memory serves me (and I'm scraping here) the book "The Natural History of Northern New England" quoted that steel, brick, and cement took 11, 8, and 7 times more energy to produce than timber, and all more expensive to recycle.

I can't speak to forestation in other states but I know it here well. Interestingly enough the word "stewardship" is not in the vocab of many I know.

Grantham NH

Username hidden
(1470 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Well, since a liberal cannot count, 1 tree, 2 trees, 3 trees and a tree may not be a tree...Is a DEER a Deer?

ADAM NOTE: The reason NY and NJ come out so low is that both states have large urban city populations. The suburbs of NY and NJ are among the most deer-dense in the nation

Destin FL

Username hidden
(14562 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Again, most people who study this stuff acknowledge there is a qualitative difference between a tree and a forest, between a reclaimed forest and virgin forest.

Go back to the transactions. I've fucked a lot of girls, but fucking my wife is the best. The transaction is the same, but they are worlds apart qualitatively.

It is a good thing that we are replanting trees and there are more trees. It is a good thing that we are reclaiming forests.

But don't try to say they are the same as they once were. That is just not true.

San Diego CA

Username hidden
(22370 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

It's no surprise, then, that the nation has more trees today than it had 75 years ago, or that about a third of the entire United States - 747 million acres - is covered with trees. Or even the fact that this amount of forestland is two-thirds of what existed in pre-Columbian America some 500 years ago.

Each American uses nearly 718 pounds of paper and 100 board feet of lumber and structural panel products annually. Some may ask if we running out of trees by harvesting so many of them for the needs of a swelling population? Not at all. Fortunately, the United States has some of the best tree-growing land in the world, and billions of tees are planted each year to sustain the forest. More wood is grown each year in the U.S. than is harvested or lost to disease, insects, and fire. Growth exceeds harvest by 28%.The Southern Pine Council

Destin FL

Username hidden
(14562 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

It would be difficult to assess that statement objectively.

Also, there probably is a qualitative difference. There may be more trees, but is there more forest?

Where I am sitting right now, I can see probably around 30 trees. Not one of them is indigenous to this area, in fact there are really no trees that are indigenous to where I sit right now.

There was that movie a while ago with Sean Connery where he was a scientist in the Amazon and had found a cure for cancer, but the discovery was threatened and eventually destroyed by clear cutting. This is fiction, I know, but the point is we don't really know what we have or are destroying. Nature is so complex that we have no way of knowing.

I believe that by now, most of the recycled (reclaimed) areas are somewhat like Disneyland. We think we know approximately what it might have been at one time, and have tried to recreate it. But the recreation is probably, at best, a poor facsimile of reality.

San Diego CA

Username hidden
(22370 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

The nation's forest land area is still about two-thirds the size it was in the year 1600, in spite of the conversion of 370 million acres of forest land to other uses, principally to agriculture. More trees are growing in America's forests today than at any time since the early 1900's. In 1900, forest growth rates were a fraction of harvest. Today, overall annual forest growth exceeds harvest by 37%. Net annual forest growth has increased 62% since 1952, and total growth per acre has increased 71%. Nationally, standing timber volume per acre in U.S. forests is 30% greater today than in 1952. On a per acre basis, net annual tree growth in the U.S. is 52 cubic feet compared with 27 in Canada and 24 in Russia. Annual growth in National Forests now exceeds harvest by more than 55%.

Bugwood The Mission of The Bugwood Work Group is to gather, create, maintain, promote the use of, and economically distribute digital information both as resources and as tools to enhance and complement information exchange and educational activities primarily in the fields of entomology, forestry, forest health and natural resources.

Destin FL

Username hidden
(14562 posts)

User Details are only visible to members.

Rush Limbaugh on Environment

Let’s count all the disproven environmental myths On no issue has the evidence of my foresight and keen political instincts been more compelling than that of the environment. Come, let us count the ways: Despite the hysterics of a few pseudo-scientists, there is no reason to believe in global warming Mankind is not responsible for depleting the ozone layer The Earth’s ecosystem is not fragile, and humans are not capable of destroying it The real enemies of the radical environmental leadership are capitalism & the American way of life There are more acres of forest land in America today than in 1492 Less-developed cultures are not kinder to nature than technologically sophisticated civilizations. The reverse more often is true Big-government regulation is not the best way to protect the environment Many environmental groups have adopted their cause with all the enthusiasm of a religious crusade, abandoning reason and accepting many faulty premises on faith Mankind is part of nature and not necessarily the enemy. Source: See, I Told You So, p.189-90 Jul 2, 1993

Animals have no fundamental rights; only people do I challenge the fundamental premise of the animal rights movement that animals are superior to human beings. [That premise] is inescapable when you examine the policies they advocate & their invariable preference for the well-being of animals, and their disregard for humans and their livelihoods. [But] let me make it perfectly clear that my belief that animals have no fundamental rights is not equivalent to saying that human beings have no moral obligation to protect animals when they can. The animal rights movement knew what it was doing when it deliberately adopted the label “animal rights.” The concept of “rights” is very powerful in the American political lexicon. Animals often treat each other with no respect, and they have no redress, absent human intervention on their behalf. Regardless of that, I believe that if people use animals to achieve their goals, they must do so responsibly, so that we don’t eliminate any species from the planet. That would be wantonly stupid and selfish.

This site does not contain sexually explicit images as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2256.
Accordingly, neither this site nor the contents contained herein are covered by the record-keeping provisions of 18 USC 2257(a)-(c).
Disclaimer: This website contains adult material. You must be over 18 to enter or 21 where applicable by law.All Members are over 18 years of age.Terms of Use|Privacy Policy